Political News and Commentary with the Right Perspective. NAVIGATION
  • Front Page
  • News
  • Multimedia
  • Tags
  • RSS Feed


  • Advertise on RightMichigan.com


    NEWS TIPS!

    Get the RightMighigan.com toolbar!


    RightMichigan.com

    Buzz

    Who are the NERD fund donors Mr Snyder?

    Raise the curtain.

    Celebrating Universal Ban on Smoking... by Republicans?


    By pauldpeterson, Section News
    Posted on Sun Dec 13, 2009 at 08:52:17 AM EST
    Tags: big_government, John_Proos, Leftism, Ron_Jelenik, smoking_ban (all tags)

    OK, so what'd I miss? As a conservative candidate for the Republican nomination for State Rep of the 79th District in 2010, I'm left scratching my head that people in my own party, the Party of Lincoln and Reagan, the Grand Ol' Party, are trumpeting about the smoking ban in Michigan along with Democrats who have ruined our state, giving a failed governor a Leftist victory in removing more freedoms from the citizenry as she, evidently, follows "scorched Michigan" policies leading up to her finally leaving office. When she came, Michigan was a great place with a great economy, competitive in the nation. When she leaves, we have record high unemployment, a continued Exodus of residents and businesses leaving for better, Right to Work states, and new special rights to raise and smoke marijuana (an illegal, controlled substance), yet the removal of the freedom to decide the policies within your own business regarding the smoking of legal tobacco products or enjoying the same in public. And people wonder why I want to lead MY party back from the Wilderness to the Promised Land, which is to the Right where the Rule of Law reigns. Have Republicans forgotten those are laws that promote freedom, liberty, and unlimited rights reserved to the States and the People? (See 10th Amendment to the Constitution.) I must dissent on this ban: This is NOT a true conservative position.

    Now, don't get me wrong, I am not a smoker; but I am a defender of individual rights. As a non-smoker, I understand and champion the right of others to have clean air to breath. It's a classic case that one person's rights end where another person's begins. Where I think the breakdown has happened in society is a lack of politeness, civil discourse, consideration of others, and simple public manners; all these things contribute towards a long tradition of smokers who would ask present company's permission to smoke; fast-forward a couple generations. Today, smokers have brought the wrath of their representatives upon them through years of preaching that they have the "right" to smoke above the rights of others in public, and the rest of us must put up with it. (I've witnessed this myself, which normally prompts me to order pickled eggs, pork `n beans, and dark beer to spoil their atmosphere.) But do people settle disputes among themselves anymore? No, of course not. We run to the government now instead of our neighbor to force people to "do" or "not do" things.

    If you're confused by this apparent dichotomy, let me clarify. Is it within the role or authority of the government to ban smoking in public colleges, universities, or other publicly paid-for buildings? Sure, I can agree with that; but let's talk about the private sector. If people respected each other's rights, and still had mutual trust born of mutual respect, politeness and a confidence in reliable public civility, they wouldn't be afraid to talk to each other in public, and then go away to smoke if they were told "no". Barring that behavior, what is a viable solution that respects the rights of business owners? Conservatives (what Republicans are supposed to be) believe in market-based solutions. Business owners should decide whether they want their business to cater to smokers or non-smokers and display what kind of business they have prominently. The free market will enable the People to decide if they want to patronize that business or even work there. I think the labor market can handle that. If you fear second-hand smoke (yet another scientific hoax perpetrated upon the rest of us), then don't work for a smoking business. No one "has to" work where people smoke. If you do, you must want to be there; simple as that. Since smokers are in a clear minority, I would bet the free-market would strike the right proportion both among patrons and workers. Meantime, people need to take responsibility for the results of their own choices, and government needs to refrain from making laws that drive people away from our state, and a smoking ban is yet another reason for people and businesses to move away, just like Illinois, home of the corrupt Chicago Machine!

    Paul "Revere" Peterson
    Republican Primary Candidate
    79th District, Michigan House
    http://www.votepaulpeterson.org

    < Why is it always the WRONG 5%? | The cost... >


    Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit


    Display: Sort:
    Again, there's a difference? (none / 0) (#2)
    by KG One on Mon Dec 14, 2009 at 09:19:05 AM EST
    Bishop said he remains opposed to any state-imposed smoking ban, but would not block a vote if fellow Republicans demand one.

    Since Sen Bishop cannot man up and get the Michigan Senate in line, he merely demonstrates (again) that there is no longer a fundamental difference between the democratic or republican parties.

    Both are willing to sell out on their principles (much like during the budget fiasco in '07) for political expediency.

    I wouldn't worry. (none / 0) (#4)
    by KG One on Tue Dec 15, 2009 at 10:13:10 AM EST
    McCain's days in the senate are numbered.

    Given the number of Republicans foregoing their principles, Jim Gilchrist will stomp a mudhole in McCain in the '10 election.

    Does anyone know... (none / 0) (#5)
    by J Baranowski on Tue Dec 15, 2009 at 02:21:06 PM EST
    What the polls look like regarding a smoke-free Michigan? Could this have won in a popular vote?

    Smoking bans should originate from either market demands or voter mandate. We have already seen many restaurants ban smoking as a result of market demands; I would assume this trend would have only continued. Which begs the question: Why, if we are already seeing a trend toward a smoke-free Michigan, does the Legislature need to mandate a smoking ban?

    What should have GOP legislators done? They should have voted no while campaigning in their local districts for more smoke-free establishments. They could have campaigned for a voter referendum.

    State law dictates that property tax changes must be put before the voters (well, with the exception of that pesky 'grandfathered' 1929 law that Washtenaw County recently used to raise taxes without a popular vote. But I digress...) Similarly, any movement that seeks to infringe on property owners' rights should be put to the voters, preferably on a local level.

    Janelle Baranowski

    Priorities!!!! (none / 0) (#7)
    by MichWolverine on Tue Dec 15, 2009 at 04:13:28 PM EST

    Can someone, anyone, explain to me why our elected officials spent their precious time discussing and voting on legislation as worthless and useless as the banning of smoking in private sector businesses?

    Without even getting into the obvious Constitutional issues, what in the wide world of sports were they doing spending a single minute on such trivial nonsense?!!!

    In light of the fact that the Democrats have put Michigan into the economic toilet bowl with no hope in sight of climbing out, one would think there were more important issues they should have been discussing ... like, say, oh I don't know, maybe spending cuts via the bloated government agencies, bureaus and commissions in order to balance their budget?  

    Display: Sort:

    Login

    Make a new account

    Username:
    Password:
    Tweet along with RightMichigan by
    following us on Twitter HERE!

    Poll

    What real conservatives think about the smoking ban?
    FOR
    AGAINST

    Votes: 6
    Results | Other Polls
    create account | faq | search